Government Control: All or Nothing?

This past week, our country has been through one of the worst economic explosions since 1929 and the Great Depression. The cause was high-risk mortgage loans, C.E.O. greed, and a lax government that watched this and figured the market would fix itself. It didn't. Now, as three major companies, AIG, Lehman Brothers, and Bear Stearns, plus Fannie May and Freddie Mac, are on the edge or in bankrupcy because of their high-risk business deals, the government has come full circle. Congress has made the decision to help rescue four of these financial entities, plus throw in another 700 billion dollars for all other mortgage-related banks and Wall Street firms. Although the government is now beginning to take complete control of our economy, in the past decade its philosophy has been the exact opposite. When banks began offering high-risk loans to unqualified homebuyers, the government should have stepped in and regulated the amount of money going into invesments that depended on people who could not pay back their loans. Instead, the government looked the other way because of the strong Republican belief in free markets. Another example of our government being too lax towards Wall Street comes in the form of a greedy C.E.O. Richard Fuld, the C.E.O. of Lehman Brothers from 1993 to 2007, recently witnessed the bankrupcy of his company. Fuld, over the last 14 years, has been calculated to have made about $17,000 dollars an hour. An hour! Again, the government failed to control this outright reckless spending of investor's money. But Lehman Brothers is not going to get off easy, as the government has decided not to pay off their debts. This lack of government regulation and order contrasts greatly to the system of controls used by the Puritan society in the 17th century. The Puritans believed in strict rules and limits to their behavior and free choice. However, the Puritan policy of constant control eventually led to a society of fear, unrest, and eventually rebellion. So how much should a government influence and control its citizens? How much rule is too much? After the events in our economy this past week, it is clear that while our government should never exhibit as much force and dominance as the Puritans, we must find a comfortable medium. A recent poll of American voters shows that about 60% are looking for greater government involvement. This compares to the same poll taken in the mid-1990's, showing about 60% who wanted the government to have less control and back off. Our country is changing, and it won't be easy to find the correct balance of freedom and restriction. What will work? It's going to a bumpy ride.